Flags in the Sanctuary: Excursus: Christian Nationalism

 Or, "What the h-e-double-hockey-sticks is Christian nationalism?"

A concern often connected to the propriety of the flag in the sanctuary, and one which is making the rounds in media circles these days, is that of Christian nationalism. For most people "Christian nationalism" is a scare term: We say it or write it in order to signal that the people getting that label are dangerous.

Now, perhaps the danger attached to the term is warranted. I hesitate to make ethical arguments by using Hitler as a counterexample or bottom of a slippery slope, but history here has a fine point: the Nazi party branded itself as the party of "German Christians," and made it clear that Christians in Germany had better be loyal to the Nazi party. So wedding nationalism and faith can be a problem. As far as I know, we don't have a "Christian Nationalist" political party in the US. So what do we really mean by the term?

Most voices in the public sphere, in my albeit small-sample-size experience, are not using the term precisely. So let's explore some options for precision.

1. Christian nationalism = belief that Christians should support nation-statehood as the best way to understand sovereignty of peoples and boundaries for rule of law. Given that most of the developed world sees states as "nations" in the modern sense, this one is boringly common and probably not worth our worry. Unless someone wants to go back to Christian monarchy, in which case we should definitely talk.

2. Christian nationalism = belief that the United States was founded on "Christian principles" and therefore should be guided by those principles in its public entities. In weighing the validity and danger of this option, one has some critical decisions to make. When we talk about "Christian principles" of the US's founding, are we talking about the beliefs of 18th-century political leaders or the principles that can be extracted directly from founding documents? If the former, then one has some heavy lifting to describe exactly which Christian principles guided all of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, etc. There is no guarantee that these folks would stand up to our tests of orthodoxy. If the latter, then it's worth starting our work by combing through the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to find references to those hallmarks of Christianity: God, Jesus, the scriptures, the Church, etc. We might have to reframe our thesis.

Strictly speaking, the national buck stops with the Constitution, so whatever Christian "shoulds" we try to foist on the US that doesn't have any backing in that document is likely (or should be) doomed to fail.

3. Christian nationalism = belief that Christianity ought to be the official religion of the United States or that only Christians can be genuine Americans--perhaps for reasons linked to #2 above or for reasons of personal or tribal power. This one brings some danger with it: If folks in power believe that non-Christians are second-class citizens then bad things begin to happen. Though the First Amendment forbids establishment of a national religion, lots of cultural power can be wielded without legal sanction.

4. Christian nationalism = belief that being Christian means being completely loyal to the United States, or, in more common terms, strongly patriotic. This is a sort of converse of #3; it may result from a sense that God gives the US a "special" status in world history to do something especially cool. This one also carries some danger because of the problem of idolatry (being unconditionally loyal to something besides God). However, a quick look at the ministry of Jesus and the prophets before him reveals that God had persistent critiques of all people groups and human-made entities, so the US is likely not an exception. As always, when we find ourselves thinking that [entity in question besides Jesus] can do no wrong, we ought to have a moment of self-examination.

Those are the distinct definitions that jump to mind; I hope they are useful in your thinking about the cultural moment we live in. When you hear someone use the term "Christian nationalism," or you use it yourself, which one of these is in play? Or is it some different one? Given the range of meanings it's probably wise for us to clarify what we mean, lest we just dump more words into the swirling toilet-bowl of media chatter.

Next time, as a final meditation on flags in the sanctuary: What's up with that "Christian flag" on the other side of the room?

~ emrys

Flags in the Sanctuary: Protection

 On 11 October 1521 the Bishop of Rome, Pope Leo X, recognized a work published by King Henry VIII entitled "Declaration of the Seven Sacraments Against Martin Luther." For this work, Leo X bestowed on Henry VIII the title "Defender of the Faith." (Anglophiles and Francophiles should continue to debate whether this title is better than the title of "most Christian" that belonged to the king of France.)

Since the mid-fourth century, the Church has recognized the capacity for kings, queens, and parliaments to "defend the faith." In some places, as with Henry VIII, the defence made by monarchs is a defence of orthodoxy: Martin Luther had been declared a heretic and thus Henry's Declaration upheld Catholic doctrine. In some places and times, "defence of the faith" might be interpreted to mean association with or affirmation of Christianity more broadly. The crown or Parliament supports or encourages the beliefs and work of the Church, and backs up that support with arms.

Contemporary Americans live in a democracy, so we do not have a monarch to take the personal title, "Defender of the Faith." And we have a constitution that forbids the establishment of any religion by the state. Instead of upholding one particular religious system, the American system prides itself on defending freedom of religion: folks in the United States are free to believe and practice any religion they choose. So "defender of the faith" changes, for us, into "defender of the right to practice any faith."

I have heard many people give thanks--to God in prayer and to each other--that we live in a country where we are free to practice our faith unmolested. I am also thankful that we are not imprisoned for our faith, or otherwise persecuted for what we believe or how we practice our religion. I think that giving thanks to God for these blessings, as with all blessings, is good. Any freedom we have is a gift from God and ought to be recognized as such.

I think, however, that we sometimes cleave to a mirror-image understanding of our freedom of religion. Such an understanding shows up on t-shirts, sweatshirts, and other paraphernalia in the phrase, "Land of the free because of the brave." While this phrase speaks truth in a materialistic sense, it fails to recognize that victory only comes to the brave if God wills it; and it may come to pass that no bravery will bring about what God does not will. If we say that freedom of religion results only from national effort, we can then go one more step and assert that the Church owes something to the nation because it is the nation that provides opportunity for Christians to practice their faith.

I wonder if the placement of the flag in Christian sanctuaries doesn't, for some of us, signify an understanding that it is only because we are Americans that we are practicing Christians. Take away the protection of the American system of government (and military, etc), and the Church would fall to ruin. So Christian faith, for its survival, needs to recognize the flag.

I see two problems with this perspective. First, having the fullness of life for the Church depend on something other than God would seem to make that other thing sovereign and God less than sovereign. Which means Jesus isn't lord of all--he's lord of everything that America gives him to lord over. Second, it belies the experience of so many Christians around the world whose faith flourishes without legal freedom of religion. In fact, there may be cases in which the faith and community of the Church are stronger because protection from the forces of the world is not guaranteed.

It is a strong faith that gives thanks to God for every blessing we experience. It is a weaker faith that cannot survive without material protection.

~ emrys